From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C0AE01392EF for ; Wed, 12 Mar 2014 13:24:21 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 75C26E0A5F; Wed, 12 Mar 2014 13:24:10 +0000 (UTC) Received: from foo.stuge.se (foo.stuge.se [212.116.89.98]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2AD5BE09F4 for ; Wed, 12 Mar 2014 13:24:08 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 4331 invoked by uid 501); 12 Mar 2014 13:24:05 -0000 Message-ID: <20140312132405.4330.qmail@stuge.se> Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2014 14:24:05 +0100 From: Peter Stuge To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Make udev optional in net-wireless/bluez? Mail-Followup-To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org References: <531BD08F.1000003@gentoo.org> <1394333701.20819.5.camel@lightboat.digis.net> <531D2FDB.5080303@gentoo.org> <1394430333.22096.27.camel@lightboat.digis.net> <1394434756.22096.44.camel@lightboat.digis.net> <531D7C72.7020709@gentoo.org> <531D8C2F.20807@gentoo.org> <531D9A92.5000706@gentoo.org> <20140310182725.7813467e@pomiot.lan> <1394494189.29514.9.camel@kanae> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="/04w6evG8XlLl3ft" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1394494189.29514.9.camel@kanae> X-Archives-Salt: 99ea7280-60f9-40d3-8743-62d767d1ebf9 X-Archives-Hash: e71df5927e3cdf2993f78f34bb129622 --/04w6evG8XlLl3ft Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Gilles Dartiguelongue wrote: > Making udev dependency always on is a deliberate choice here I thought Gentoo was about users having choice? Sad face. > we simply don't want users to get confused That's not helpful, when the premise is to deliver choice. I hope someone does apply the patch. //Peter --/04w6evG8XlLl3ft Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFTIF/1hR3Q0dhIfEgRApXTAKC+zrR7OCX6KpIE33ci75RcpUB8IACeJjaR 640D5lhXvJ8M5bb+nj3mplc= =Hn4g -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --/04w6evG8XlLl3ft--